1952 Holden FX vs. 2003 Renault Megane
To start off, 2003 Renault Megane is newer by 51 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1952 Holden FX. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1952 Holden FX would be higher. At 2,166 cc (6 cylinders), 1952 Holden FX is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2003 Renault Megane (114 HP) has 63 more horse power than 1952 Holden FX. (51 HP) In normal driving conditions, 2003 Renault Megane should accelerate faster than 1952 Holden FX.
Because 1952 Holden FX is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1952 Holden FX. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2003 Renault Megane, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2003 Renault Megane (152 Nm) has 16 more torque (in Nm) than 1952 Holden FX. (136 Nm). This means 2003 Renault Megane will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1952 Holden FX.
Compare all specifications:
1952 Holden FX | 2003 Renault Megane | |
Make | Holden | Renault |
Model | FX | Megane |
Year Released | 1952 | 2003 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 2166 cc | 1598 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
Horse Power | 51 HP | 114 HP |
Torque | 136 Nm | 152 Nm |
Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Vehicle Length | 4380 mm | 4510 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1780 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1580 mm | 1470 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 2690 mm |